Tennessee pol threatens New Yorkers after tourist busted at Ground Zero with loaded gun

[Anonymous]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/hey-yorkers-y-better-watch-yer-speed-tennessee-warns-rep-frank-niceley-article-1.1009002

[takoma]

I'd call it a warning rather than a threat. And I think his claim that it was tongue-in-cheek has some credibility.

I think prison time for the woman with the gun would be silly, but a fine would be fine. It's also a good thing that the case is being publicized so future tourists will know better.

[Anonymous]

takoma wrote:I'd call it a warning rather than a threat. And I think his claim that it was tongue-in-cheek has some credibility.

I think prison time for the woman with the gun would be silly, but a fine would be fine. It's also a good thing that the case is being publicized so future tourists will know better.

I dunno - Plaxico Burress pled guilty to a similar charge and received a 2-year jail sentence. (And why do I think this particular Tennessee legislator had no problem with that outcome?) I'm not sure why Ms. Graves should be treated differently - because she's a medical student? Female? White?

[Anonymous]

takoma wrote:I'd call it a warning rather than a threat. And I think his claim that it was tongue-in-cheek has some credibility.

I think prison time for the woman with the gun would be silly, but a fine would be fine. It's also a good thing that the case is being publicized so future tourists will know better.

Didn't they send a basketball player to prison for two years for the same offense. I don't believe the player had a prior conviction. If the player did not have a prior conviction, why the double standard. Only a freaking idiot would take a gun, loaded at that, to ground zero. Did she not know what the place represented.

Oh, and how do you drive through Tennessee if you are coming directly from New York.

[Anonymous]

12;21 here. Sorry 10:57, I guess I should have read a little bit further down before hitting reply,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

takoma wrote:I'd call it a warning rather than a threat. And I think his claim that it was tongue-in-cheek has some credibility.

I think prison time for the woman with the gun would be silly, but a fine would be fine. It's also a good thing that the case is being publicized so future tourists will know better.

Didn't they send a basketball player to prison for two years for the same offense. I don't believe the player had a prior conviction. If the player did not have a prior conviction, why the double standard. Only a freaking idiot would take a gun, loaded at that, to ground zero. Did she not know what the place represented.

Oh, and how do you drive through Tennessee if you are coming directly from New York.

Which raises an interesting point - presumably this nitwit didn't fly, with her gun, to NYC, so via car she likely passed through NJ, MD, Del, maybe PA - wouldn't it be great if those states charged her as well?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

takoma wrote:I'd call it a warning rather than a threat. And I think his claim that it was tongue-in-cheek has some credibility.

I think prison time for the woman with the gun would be silly, but a fine would be fine. It's also a good thing that the case is being publicized so future tourists will know better.

I dunno - Plaxico Burress pled guilty to a similar charge and received a 2-year jail sentence. (And why do I think this particular Tennessee legislator had no problem with that outcome?) I'm not sure why Ms. Graves should be treated differently - because she's a medical student? Female? White?

Umm, perhaps because the gun didn't go off? Or perhaps because it was only discovered because the woman was attempting to check it to comply with a "no guns" sign? Don't get me wrong, Plaxico got screwed too, but jail time for this woman would be an even graver injustice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

takoma wrote:I'd call it a warning rather than a threat. And I think his claim that it was tongue-in-cheek has some credibility.

I think prison time for the woman with the gun would be silly, but a fine would be fine. It's also a good thing that the case is being publicized so future tourists will know better.

I dunno - Plaxico Burress pled guilty to a similar charge and received a 2-year jail sentence. (And why do I think this particular Tennessee legislator had no problem with that outcome?) I'm not sure why Ms. Graves should be treated differently - because she's a medical student? Female? White?

Umm, perhaps because the gun didn't go off? Or perhaps because it was only discovered because the woman was attempting to check it to comply with a "no guns" sign? Don't get me wrong, Plaxico got screwed too, but jail time for this woman would be an even graver injustice.

You're right about the gun going off - maybe she should just get 1 year, instead of two. But like it or not, NYC has strict gun control laws, and people routinely get jail time for illegally carrying concealed weapons. If that's the case, there's reason this woman shoudl get special treatment. Even if (or especially if) she's a pretty, white southern girl that has gun nuts up in arms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

takoma wrote:I'd call it a warning rather than a threat. And I think his claim that it was tongue-in-cheek has some credibility.

I think prison time for the woman with the gun would be silly, but a fine would be fine. It's also a good thing that the case is being publicized so future tourists will know better.

I dunno - Plaxico Burress pled guilty to a similar charge and received a 2-year jail sentence. (And why do I think this particular Tennessee legislator had no problem with that outcome?) I'm not sure why Ms. Graves should be treated differently - because she's a medical student? Female? White?

Umm, perhaps because the gun didn't go off? Or perhaps because it was only discovered because the woman was attempting to check it to comply with a "no guns" sign? Don't get me wrong, Plaxico got screwed too, but jail time for this woman would be an even graver injustice.

You're right about the gun going off - maybe she should just get 1 year, instead of two. But like it or not, NYC has strict gun control laws, and people routinely get jail time for illegally carrying concealed weapons. If that's the case, there's reason this woman shoudl get special treatment. Even if (or especially if) she's a pretty, white southern girl that has gun nuts up in arms.

I get that you like the idea of putting a pretty, white southern girl in jail on general principles. I just don't agree. Even if NYC's gun control laws are defensible, which I disagree with as well, the facts here present a pretty compelling case for declination of prosecution or executive clemency. That's why we have those concepts in the criminal justice system at all.

[Anonymous]

I get that you like the idea of putting a pretty, white southern girl in jail on general principles. I just don't agree. Even if NYC's gun control laws are defensible, which I disagree with as well, the facts here present a pretty compelling case for declination of prosecution or executive clemency. That's why we have those concepts in the criminal justice system at all.

No, not at all. But I don't like the idea of a double standard that seems, to me at least, to be based in large part on race.

And NY's laws are defensible, in that they've passed muster by the state appellate and federal courts.

And I'm curious as to what facts lead you to the conclusion that prosecution should be declined.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I get that you like the idea of putting a pretty, white southern girl in jail on general principles. I just don't agree. Even if NYC's gun control laws are defensible, which I disagree with as well, the facts here present a pretty compelling case for declination of prosecution or executive clemency. That's why we have those concepts in the criminal justice system at all.

No, not at all. But I don't like the idea of a double standard that seems, to me at least, to be based in large part on race.

And NY's laws are defensible, in that they've passed muster by the state appellate and federal courts.

And I'm curious as to what facts lead you to the conclusion that prosecution should be declined.

How on earth are you getting a double standard "based in large part on race" when the only two cases considered on this thread have a much more significant difference, in that the gun went off in one of them, and not the other, and someone was actually shot in one of them (albeit shot by himself)? That's a huge difference in culpability. As I said, I think Plaxico got screwed, but that was less to do with race, I think, and more to do with him being a celebrity and Bloomberg trying to make a point; Plaxico kind of got the Martha Stewart treatment, and she was surely not singled out because of her race.

As for defensibility, I wasn't referring to legal defensibility, I think that it is ridiculous as a matter of policy to have mandatory minimums for first-time, non-violent offenses of this nature. Judges should have more sentencing discretion in such cases.

I think declination is appropriate here because of the unusually low level of culpability (i.e., she's a tourist and has a better excuse for not knowing the law than a resident; she was only caught when she tried to comply with "a no guns allowed" sign); she doesn't present a significant recidivism risk; and, most significantly, the draconian nature of the minimum penalty. If sentencing were more nuanced, probation or a fine would be a better disposition, but since that seems not to be available, declination would be appropriate here. I'd revisit the issue if she turns out to have a meaningful criminal history. You should bear in mind that it is a baseline principle of our criminal justice system that prosecutors are not *required* to prosecute in any particular case. This is not a special exception for white girls, and if you have ever been warned instead of given a speeding ticket, you have been the beneficiary of precisely that sort of discretion. Law is a very blunt instrument, so some judgment is necessary to make the system work well.

[Anonymous]

I wouldn't throw the book at her, but it's handgun 101 to know whether you are even licensed to carry when you are traveling between states. I'm sure she'll just get a fine, but they are smart to make a fuss. Every gun owner in the country is going to read about her and learn something from it.

[Anonymous]

I think declination is appropriate here because of the unusually low level of culpability (i.e., she's a tourist and has a better excuse for not knowing the law than a resident; she was only caught when she tried to comply with "a no guns allowed" sign);

Sorry, I simply don't believe she didn't know. This is a 39 yo woman who is a medical student. It strains credulity to expect us to believe that she didn't know that NYC had strict gun control laws, and that her Tennessee license to carry doesn't mean anything there. Come on. Much more likely is that she knew all about it and just decided to keep the gun for protection anyway - after all, it's NYC, with criminals on every corner! And even if she didn't know, she's not some 18 yo functional illiterate - she's an intelligent woman, tourist or not, and her ignorance isn't an excuse. (FWIW, the whole city is a "no guns allowed" zone without proper authorization. I'm not giving her credit for obeying a sign (when she had no choice - isn't there a metal detector?) when she previously flouted the law.)

she doesn't present a significant recidivism risk;

Why not? Because it was just an honest mistake on her part, and she knows better now? We'll have to disagree on that - as I've said, I simply don't believe this was an honest mistake.

and, most significantly, the draconian nature of the minimum penalty.

This is driven by your distaste for the law - you don't agree with it at all, as you've said, but disagreeing with the law doesn't constutute a reason not to charge. Plus, it's likely that if charged she'll plead down and accept a lesser penalty, perhaps the to the probation you find appropriate.

[TheManWithAUsername]

Anonymous wrote:How on earth are you getting a double standard "based in large part on race" when the only two cases considered on this thread have a much more significant difference, in that the gun went off in one of them, and not the other, and someone was actually shot in one of them (albeit shot by himself)? That's a huge difference in culpability.

I don't have an opinion on the race factor here (though it's inarguable that blacks generally get worse sentences), but shouldn't he have gotten a lesser sentence? Being shot in the leg is a pretty big punishment already, especially for him. Just a side point.

Anonymous wrote:As for defensibility, I wasn't referring to legal defensibility, I think that it is ridiculous as a matter of policy to have mandatory minimums for first-time, non-violent offenses of this nature. Judges should have more sentencing discretion in such cases.

This seems like a perfectly good place for mandatory sentencing. Whether you're carrying your concealed gun b/c you're a scofflaw or because you're an irresponsible gun owner, NYC doesn't want it there. It would obviously be worse is she had been carrying it to kill someone, but there are separate crimes for that. Instead, she's just an idiot, and I might prefer someone craftily keeping their gun. She strikes me as the kind of person who might misplace it or have it stolen.

Anonymous wrote:she's a tourist and has a better excuse for not knowing the law than a resident

If you don't know that NYC is likely to have tougher gun laws than Tennessee, you're too stupid to own a gun. And even if it weren't so obvious, this should be a basic responsibility of gun ownership. You could see this as a green M&Ms situation - if you're irresponsible in this way, it indicates that you generally aren't adequately responsible with your gun.

Anonymous wrote:she was only caught when she tried to comply with "a no guns allowed" sign

Irrelevant to me. The crime is the crime, not the getting caught.

Anonymous wrote:she doesn't present a significant recidivism risk

And THIS is where unconscious racism gets to run wild. Those are just the stats.

The obvious response to this factor is that NYC wants to send a message - one that some people apparently need to hear. If they let her off, what does that tell the other morons?

I would hope that responsible gun owners would see this woman as an embarrassment who deserves what she gets, the way that many dog owners dislike people with untrained dangerous dogs.

[TheManWithAUsername]

Oops - sorry for any redundancies with PPs.